|
| |
LEGALIZATION OF HEROIN.
Term Paper ID:28829
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Presents argements against legalization because of greater risks if would entail. History of usage. Political factors.... More...
|
9 Pages / 2025 Words
15 sources, 15 Citations,
APA Format
$36.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Presents argements against legalization because of greater risks if would entail. History of usage. Political factors.
Paper Introduction:
America’s war on drugs has been an abysmal failure, according to many critics. They claim that the drug trade continues largely unabated, leaving corruption and death in its wake. Consequently, they call for the legalization of drugs. This paper will argue against that proposal based on political models (incrementalism and rationalism) and the risks that would be created by legalization. No drug makes those risks more apparent than heroin, which has already wrought great harm.
Proponents of legalization maintain that drug use is endemic in society, so attempts at prohibition are fruitless. Worse, the war on drugs causes more harm than good. Such harm includes the thousands of addicts who are imprisoned rather than treated, billions of dollars spent to deter drug traffickers that could be better spent elsewhere, the corruption of government officials (both
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
The statutory requirement thatadministrative agencies engage in cost/benefit analysis before enacting anynew rules also reflects an incremental approach. Weiland, though, has been lucky compared to some. spends billions of dollars in the war on drugs, involving thousands oflaw enforcement officers at the federal, state, and local level. That has changed becausemany addicts have been able to lead normal lives thanks to methadone, andso far it is only proven treatment method for heroin addicts (Housewright,2 , p. . No drug makes those risks more apparentthan heroin, which has already wrought great harm. Would those warnings besufficient? Though not asfamous, the death of Jonathan Melvoin also created a stir. "Heroin: pharmacology."www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/heroin.html. The drug interferes with the brain's ability to perceive pain,and it is very addictive. (1998, December 31). Bureau of Justice Statistics, which found that 21percent of state prison inmates in 1997 were incarcerated because of drugoffenses (both dealers and users, with more of the former than the latter). That figure represents a drop from 22 percent in 199 , while the overallstate prison population increased by 3 percent (from 1 million to 1.3million) during that time. Thoseaddicted to heroin will cease to be productive members of society andinstead become a drain. As mentioned earlier, duringthe 198 s and 199 s, drug use among young people decreased dramatically.Many critics claim that the decline reflects a demographic trend that beganbefore the war on drugs intensified. Rather, the use of drugs is what seems to lead to manycrimes. Another grungerocker, Scott Weiland of Stone Temple Pilots, has had a very public battlewith heroin addiction. Clearly that is often not the case, but even if itwere, it still could not be justified according to the rationalism model.Society does not benefit from a group rendered useless by heroin. The lack of purity (one to ten percent)meant that the drug could only be taken via hypodermic needle, asignificant bar to use by many people. C1. From an incrementalism standpoint, however, Nadelmann's argument thatwe abandon the war on drugs entirely is fatally flawed. On the other hand, maybe thewar on drugs follows that changing view. Those urging legalization of drugs also rely on other speciousassertions. Ehrenfeld, R. "My son's unfinished life-and mine." Newsweek, p. A26. This incrementalism has continued under successive administrations(George Bush from 1989 to 1993 and Bill Clinton since 1993). The President's moral authority helped changethe terms of the debate. Have these incremental policies worked? In 1999, a judge sentencedWeiland to nearly a year in jail because he violated his probation a thirdtime-and after he had participated in yet another treatment program. Indeed, in 1999, the federalgovernment reported that, for the first time, the number of people checkinginto treatment centers for heroin addiction exceeded the number beingtreated for cocaine dependency (Meckler). The vast majority of prisoners wereincarcerated for violent and/or repeat offenses. Heroin use extends beyond the rich and famous to the merely rich, tothe middle class, and to the poor. The police alsoreported that after Melvoin's death, red rum became even more sought afteramong New York's drug addicts (Crowe, p. Nadelmann, E. Do theproponents of legalization make a strong enough case to justify ending thedrug war and the incremental approach? (1999, November 3). Weaning those addicts off heroin will often prove impossible.Musician Boz Scaggs (1999) recently wrote of his son, who got off heroinand had his life back in order. His storyexemplifies the hold that heroin exerts over users. 1J). "Heroin chic" described the glassy-eyed stare ofnear-anorexic fashion models, a look that became very hip during the 199 s. Many government agencies resisted such treatment, claiming thatit simply substituted one addiction for another. (1999, May 27). That laissez faire attitude ended with the whenPresident Reagan took office in 1981. Department of Justice, 2 ). Each step is a logicalextension of the current approach. If the bar ofillegality is removed, many people will be tempted to try the drug. Housewright, E. According toHobbes' rationalism, humans must surrender some of their sovereignty togovernment or disorder will result and the condition of man will be"solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." So, too, will be the case ifdrugs are legalized, at least for those addicted to heroin. (2 , February 27). Most resort to incrementalism, where they attempt to implementtheir vision piece by piece. References Bureau of Justice Statistics. "Heroin surpasses cocaine at drugtreatment centers." San Jose Mercury News,www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v99/n911/a1 .html. "Will common sense ever govern ourdrug policies?" International Herald Tribune,www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v99/n1194/a 9.html?68885 Partnership for a Drug-Free America. (2 ). Heroin hot spots popped up around thecountry, from Eugene, Oregon to Parsippany, New Jersey to Tampa, Florida.Several magazine articles and a documentary chronicled a rash of heroinoverdoes among young people in the well-to-do Texas community of Plano.During a three-year period (1996-98), 18 young residents of Plano died ofheroin overdoses. Therefore, the number of heroin users will increase, as will thenumber of deaths from overdose. "Heroin deaths fuel music industry's soul-searching." Los Angeles Times, p. During the 199 s, however, several suburban communitiesseemed to be suffering heroin epidemics among teenagers and young adults.Heroin use seemed to transcend race and class. All these factors contributed to heroin's renewedpopularity, and if that trend continues, usage levels could rival those ofthe 197 s (U.S. Instead of trying to arrest and prosecute drug users, the so-called"harm reduction" movement says we should channel our energies to limitingthe harm done by those who cannot or will not stop using drugs (Wren, 2 ,p. Based on those facts, social gain will not be maximized by legalizingdrugs, particularly heroin. The drug reached the height of its popularity in the U.S. (1996, February 7). Scaggs, B. Heroin also enjoyed increasing popularity among rock musicians, mostnotably Kurt Cobain, the founder of the band Nirvana and one of theoriginators of "grunge rock." Cobain made no secret of his heroin useduring Nirvana's heyday, and many blame the drug for his suicide, whichresulted from a shotgun blast (Crowe, 1996, p. "A prescription for beatingheroin." Dallas Morning News, p. The kids in Plano were sufficiently warnedand still found the pull of the drug too great to withstand. According to Nadelmann, the war on drugs has only succeeded incorrupting governments (such as Colombia and now Mexico) and created apolice-state atmosphere in the U.S. That changed when he decided to celebratea new job with a hit of heroin, a hit that proved fatal. 1J. In the case of drugs,reason tells us that legalization will lead to greater use. We already see thistaking place in the growing acceptance of methadone treatment for heroinaddicts. They may not finish before leaving office,but often times they will create enough momentum that the policy will becontinued by their successor. "Drug-free resourcenet." www.drugfreeamerica.org/heroin.html Powell, J. Proof that heroin use had spread among all classes and races can befound in popular culture. (1996, July 15). 1). Even as the body count increased, the young people kept using."Kids would sometimes attend a friend's funeral, and after sobbing at agraveside, immediately go out and score" (Gray, 1999, p. F1, F16. America's war on drugs has been an abysmal failure, according to manycritics. No reasonable argument can be made that the greater good benefitsfrom the abuse of such substances, particularly heroin. Heroin is a fast-acting drug that quickly givesthe user a "high," sometimes in a matter of seconds (if injected). during theearly 197 s, then experienced a dramatic decline after it came to be viewedas a hardcore drug for junkies. Soros, G. That figure is completely wrong,according to the U.S. Department of Justice, 2 ). "Heroin-overdose deaths increasing inMinneapolis." Minneapolis Star-Tribune, www.startribune.com. Public perception of illegal drug use has become verynegative, either because of the war on drugs. For example, a shift inemphasis from interdiction to treatment may be warranted. Mostwill not become users, but some will, especially if the drug is highlyaddictive (such as heroin). More importantly, the illegality of drugs is not whatcauses crime. C1). Political leaders often enter office with grand plans of remakinggovernment, and they often must shelve those plans in the face of politicalrealities. Then Nancy Reagan, the first lady, started the"Just Say No" campaign. Families will be devastated, causing incalculableharm. "Texas heroin massacre." Rolling Stone, p.32-36. Meanwhile, narcotics continue to flowinto the country despite our best efforts to stop them, and hundreds ofthousands of drug addicts flood the court systems unnecessarily. Legalizing or decriminalizing drug use would allows us to redirectmuch of the multibillion budget for drug interdiction to treatment.Moreover, the police could focus their attention on dangerous criminalsrather than wasting their time apprehending drug addicts. Some critics of thedrug war, most notably William F. Ehrenfeld (1996) writes that "more than four times as many murdersare committed while under the influence of drugs than are committed to getmoney to buy drugs." Finally, pro-legalization arguments do not take into account thedestructive and addictive nature of some drugs, such as heroin. Such purity allows users to snort, smoke oringest the drug, making the drug much more popular. (2 , January 2). Some oftheir criticisms of current drug policy are valid, however, and some oftheir policy suggestions should be incorporated. That began to change in the late 199 s as heroin became more pure.Recent seizures by law enforcement indicate that heroin has reached puritylevels as high as 98 percent. Politicians and anti-drug advocates accused the fashion industry ofenticing young people to use the drug by making heroin seem alluring. Those tactics helped alter public perception,which facilitated the ultimate goal: stronger drug laws, more aggressiveenforcement and interdiction, mandatory sentencing, and less tolerance fordrug dealers and drug users. Spindler, A. 1), and with good reason. Proponents of legalization maintain that drug use is endemic insociety, so attempts at prohibition are fruitless. This paper will argue against that proposal basedon political models (incrementalism and rationalism) and the risks thatwould be created by legalization. "Small but forceful coalition works tocounter U.S. 32-36). and abroad), and the countlessdeaths that could be prevented (Soros, 1997, p. For example, they claim that legalizing drugs would reducecrime because addicts would no longer have to steal to support their habit. Worse, the war on drugscauses more harm than good. Do we really want morepeople in that drug's grasp? (1999,August). Would it matter? Is such a complete reversalwarranted? New approaches to treatment also are needed. In 1997 alone, emergency room doctors in the citytreated 75 to 1 young people for heroin overdoses. Incrementalism accurately describes the American approach to illegaldrugs. Consequently, they call for thelegalization of drugs. Heroin is a powerful narcotic derived fromthe poppy. Presumablythe drug would carry warnings if legalized. This model applies reason to the facts to determine which course ofaction will net the greatest gain for society. (1999, February 22). Such stories provide fuel for both sides in the legalization debate.Proponents argue that legalization and more treatment options would helpthose kids more than jail, which many faced after this story broke.(Several of the addicts profiled by Gray had received treatment, with apoor success rate.) Opponents counter that the last thing we need is morepeople experimenting with such a potent drug. Wren, C.S. "The drug war cannot be won."Washington Post, p. 1. They claim that the drug trade continues largely unabated,leaving corruption and death in its wake. In the 198 s, fear of contractingAIDS became a further disincentive for heroin use (Powell, 2 ). Meckler, L. This begs the question: even legalized drugs will not be free, so how arethey going to pay? Consequently, many illicit drug producers switched, which loweringheroin's street price. "Thosewho become addicted to drugs merit compassion and treatment, notdemonization and incarceration." Addicts do deserve compassion and treatment, and that is how mostaddicts are processed by the criminal justice system. Both stances are relevant to the next step, which is to apply themodels utilized by American policymakers. (2 , March 4). His advisors recognized that thenation would not be receptive to an immediate get-tough policy on drugs, sothey set about changing the climate. Pro-legalization forces argue that using drugsonly hurts the user. Similarly, the legalization argument also fails in a rationalismmodel. Incrementalism describes a situation where government modifiespolicies rather than abandoning them completely. A death tarnishes fashion's heroinlook. Moreover, they say that it has onlyreduced drug use among middle-class Americans, the group that is leastlikely to develop a long-term problem with drugs (Nadelmann). Even asmall amount can lead to an overdose and death (Partnership for a Drug-FreeAmerica, 2 ). Buckley, claim that 5 percent of stateprisoners are there for drug crimes. Melvoin, akeyboardist for the band Smashing Pumpkins, died from an overdose in 1996.New York police said Melvoin had used "red rum," a more potent version ofheroin that is supposed to give off a greater high. The American drug culture flourished during the permissiveness ofthe 196 s and 197 s. Department of Justice. "Prisonstatistics." www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm Crowe, J. Many famous rockershave died from drug overdoses, including legends such as Jimmy Hendrix,Charlie Parker, Janis Joplin, Keith Moon, and Jim Morrison. Moreover,even if legal, those under 21 likely would still not be permitted to buythem, so the illegal trade in drugs would undoubtedly continue among teens. Such harm includes the thousands of addictswho are imprisoned rather than treated, billions of dollars spent to deterdrug traffickers that could be better spent elsewhere, the corruption ofgovernment officials (both in the U.S. The administration began by using the bully pulpit of the White Houseto speak out against drugs. drug policy in the opposite direction for two decades. 15. Heroin's increasing availability and ease of use attracted a new kindof drug user: upper-class and middle-class youths. Gray, M. This applies across the board, not just to mind-alteringdrugs. (1997, February 2). war on drugs." The New York Times, p. "1998 national household survey on drug abuse."www.samhsa.gov/PRESS/99/99 818fs.htm U.S. (1999, August 26). Regardless of thereason, drug use is down by nearly half in sheer numbers and considerablymore as a percentage of the American population. They would soon learn that chiva is the Mexican wordfor heroin, in this case 35 percent pure and mixed with an antihistamine.Even those who knew what they were taking did not understand theconsequences of mixing heroin with alcohol. As members of society, we forsake some of our rights to benefit thegreater good. Heroin comes in powderform, so a little goes a long way, and that makes it easier to smuggle thedrug into America (U.S. Today theU.S. Nonetheless, Nadelmannasks us to junk the current strategy and completely reverse course, basedon the dubious premise that the war on drugs has failed. Though many Americans support medical marijuana initiatives, the vastmajority opposes the legalization of hard drugs such as heroin (Wren, 2 ,P. "Harm reductionmeans first that adults who consume drugs without putting others in harm'sway are not the government's business, whether their drug is marijuana,coca, heroin, ayahuasca, tobacco or alcohol" (Nadelmann, 1999). The band had to cancel a tour in 1995 after Weilandentered drug rehabilitation (Crowe, p. Hence the epidemic ofoverdoes. Onepurveyor of heroin chic, 2 -year-old fashion photographer Davide Sorrenti,also became one of the drug's victims when he died from an overdose in 1997(Spindler). F1). Thus, from an incremental standpoint, the pro-legalization have notmade a strong enough case for abandoning our current policies. This is because today's drugs (not justheroin but also marijuana and cocaine) are much more potent. Over time, the piece-by-piece changescan amount to a new policy, or a strengthening of the original strategy. Overall, drug use hassharply declined among young people, from 25 million in 1979 to 13.6million in 1998. F16). (2 ). "Can we afford to give up the drugwar?" The Wall Street Journal, p. For example, the legalizationmovement flies in the face of incrementalism, which has been slowly pullingU.S. (1997, May 2 ). Many denied taking heroin, claiming they had used a much less potentdrug called chiva. Federaland state governments have enacted tougher laws and mandatory sentencingguidelines. F16). The New York Times, www.nytimes.com/library/style/heroin-fashion.html Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
